Do you have adblock enabled?
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Guardian)   Local billionaires think it's wrong that there are people who sleep in cars in Silicon Valley because they are homeless, and want to improve their quality of life   (theguardian.com) divider line 433
    More: Asinine, homeless  
•       •       •

12319 clicks; posted to Main » on 16 Apr 2014 at 12:15 PM (45 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



433 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-04-16 02:35:32 PM  

jigger: I thought California was good to the homeless.


The homeless population density of SF is roughly the normal population density of the state of South Carolina.  I feel sorry for that homeless guy.   I hate all of those homeless people for the same reasons as that guy was having major troubles in India.  Especially when they shut down the subway because the escalator is clogged with homeless guy shiat.

/And CA is generally pretty nice.  If nothing else, the weather is nice.  The state wouldn't have a third of this nation's welfare recipients if it wasn't.
 
2014-04-16 02:37:03 PM  

bunner: Let's say they used to make stuff there and now it's abandoned and some fat bastard is letting it rot because he wants 2,000,000.00 for something nobody has any use for anymore.Let's say we turn the water and electric on, do some buildouts, install about 40 sh*tters and showers, some security measure, windows and staff it with some unemployed folks with social services degrees.


That's nice in theory, but as usual, reality gets in they way.  Many times, it's the reality other people with similarly lofty ideas created.

Is that building zoned for residential?  One reason they may have trouble selling it is that it's not (yet?) zoned for a use that others might find desirable and there may infrastructure problems that preclude it's alternative use.

How old is it, does it have sufficient fire protection for 40+ residents, can the water and sewer service handle 40+ residents in that building, what's the power like, are there nearby schools for children, is the rest of the area heavy industrial which can mean noise and air pollution?
 
2014-04-16 02:38:05 PM  

pedrop357: I'm also curious why people sleeping in their cars aren't being attacked by the left as freeloaders because they get police and fire protection without paying any property taxes.


The right is who typically would be more likely to do that sort of blaming.
 
2014-04-16 02:39:38 PM  

Pangea: pedrop357: I'm also curious why people sleeping in their cars aren't being attacked by the left as freeloaders because they get police and fire protection without paying any property taxes.

The right is who typically would be more likely to do that sort of blaming.


Not true at all.  The left can be counted on to chime into any discussion about taxes with biatching about roads, schools, police, fire, and Somalia.
 
2014-04-16 02:40:03 PM  
The homeless deserve housing, food, and health care.

However, they smell, are annoying and are typically mentally instable, so not in Palo Alto, Menlo Park,or Los Altos, please, and especially not Atherton.   Maybe in East Palo Alto, Vallejo, or Oakland or hippy-dippy Santa Cruz.
 
2014-04-16 02:41:01 PM  
24.media.tumblr.com
 
2014-04-16 02:41:24 PM  

bonobo73: The homeless deserve housing, food, and health care.

However, they smell, are annoying and are typically mentally instable, so not in Palo Alto, Menlo Park,or Los Altos, please, and especially not Atherton.   Maybe in East Palo Alto, Vallejo, or Oakland or hippy-dippy Santa Cruz.


Feel free to give them all the housing, food, and health care you can afford.
 
2014-04-16 02:43:07 PM  

Dr Dreidel: // and if you really can't see an appreciable difference between the homelessness of the 1950s and the homelessness of today - or the compounding problems both then and now - there's no point in discussing it further


The other day my mom was telling me about growing up in the 1950s in Cleveland.

They used to see lots of fires out by the dump. That was were the homeless used to set up camp and live. I'm sure that experience wasn't limited to just one city in the cold northeast.
 
2014-04-16 02:43:39 PM  

pedrop357: bunner: Let's say they used to make stuff there and now it's abandoned and some fat bastard is letting it rot because he wants 2,000,000.00 for something nobody has any use for anymore.Let's say we turn the water and electric on, do some buildouts, install about 40 sh*tters and showers, some security measure, windows and staff it with some unemployed folks with social services degrees.

That's nice in theory, but as usual, reality gets in they way.  Many times, it's the reality other people with similarly lofty ideas created.

Is that building zoned for residential?  One reason they may have trouble selling it is that it's not (yet?) zoned for a use that others might find desirable and there may infrastructure problems that preclude it's alternative use.

How old is it, does it have sufficient fire protection for 40+ residents, can the water and sewer service handle 40+ residents in that building, what's the power like, are there nearby schools for children, is the rest of the area heavy industrial which can mean noise and air pollution?


Oh, dear!  There's a rail line 4 blocks way!  How will they get sleep?  My guess is a washed ass under a roof with a sh*tter and a minifridge and a small lamp to fill out job applications with an address beats a 94 Toyota.
 
2014-04-16 02:43:45 PM  

Pangea: LeroyBourne: armor helix: There are a lot of homeless shelters with empty rooms every night.

The reason? You have to be sober to use them.

If getting high is more important than a roof over your head that's your choice. But I don't want you sleeping in my dumpster.

One time my sister tried to give a hobo her left over Chinese food as her and her bf were walking home.  The guy had the balls to say, 'fark that, give me money'  He got nothing.

I offered a panhandler and actual handful of silver change...probably about $4 worth.

He said "I prefer paper."

He got neither.


Who ever said beggars can't be choosers?
 
2014-04-16 02:48:17 PM  

MaliFinn: At some point some very rich people are going to end up getting a lethal education in the difference between power and authority.  You can get away with a lot of things, but creating a system where you have a permanent underclass that is allowed to own firearms is a pretty dangerous practice.


Increasingly, that permanent underclass is often branded with a criminal record, and subjected to the criminal justice system, removing them from that demographic.

All going according to plan?
 
2014-04-16 02:48:42 PM  

bunner: pedrop357: bunner: Let's say they used to make stuff there and now it's abandoned and some fat bastard is letting it rot because he wants 2,000,000.00 for something nobody has any use for anymore.Let's say we turn the water and electric on, do some buildouts, install about 40 sh*tters and showers, some security measure, windows and staff it with some unemployed folks with social services degrees.

That's nice in theory, but as usual, reality gets in they way.  Many times, it's the reality other people with similarly lofty ideas created.

Is that building zoned for residential?  One reason they may have trouble selling it is that it's not (yet?) zoned for a use that others might find desirable and there may infrastructure problems that preclude it's alternative use.

How old is it, does it have sufficient fire protection for 40+ residents, can the water and sewer service handle 40+ residents in that building, what's the power like, are there nearby schools for children, is the rest of the area heavy industrial which can mean noise and air pollution?

Oh, dear!  There's a rail line 4 blocks way!  How will they get sleep?  My guess is a washed ass under a roof with a sh*tter and a minifridge and a small lamp to fill out job applications with an address beats a 94 Toyota.


I love that you ignored the rest of the post for the noise pollution part.

You realize that zoning rules have precluded building things in noisy areas without asking any of the prospective residents if they even care, right?  If I have a nice plot of land near an airport and I wan to zone it residential, the noise issue alone can be the thing that they use to deny me.  What those possible future residents may or may not want isn't always taken into consideration.

Oh wait, you just came up a lofty idea without considering the logistics of it.  This is, unsurprisingly, a lot like the people who make zoning regs so restrictive in the first place.
 
2014-04-16 02:50:35 PM  

Dr Dreidel: Lee451: 50 years of throwing money at poverty has not solved it and, in many cases, it took away incentives from the poor to better themselves

You understand we've been "throwing money at the problem" for a hundred times that long (at least)?

So either we can throw up our hands and continue letting people live without regular living accommodations, or we can keep attacking the problem - and if you can suggest ways of helping homeless people that don't involve spending money, I think everyone in the world is all ears - using the only means available.

// and if you really can't see an appreciable difference between the homelessness of the 1950s and the homelessness of today - or the compounding problems both then and now - there's no point in discussing it further


I guess you missed the part of my post that suggested "adopting" a homeless person and trying to make a difference in their lives.


By throwing money at the problem I was referring to the "Great Society" program and that the poor/homeless just keep increasing.


/America has the wealthiest poor in the world, especially if you compare the poor here and the poor in India or some other 3rd world nation. Most people considered poor have a car, modern appliances, internet capabilities, and frequently, nice furniture from Rent-a-Center, you get the idea.

Pangea: Lee451: I would like to suggest that anyone who is that upset about the homeless, instead of expecting "the government" to do something about the problem, "adopt" a homeless person or family and get personal. Instead of buying Starbucks every morning, buy your adopted homeless person a breakfast. See that they get 3 meals a day; it doesn't have to be expensive; as you cook your dinner, fix an extra portion for your adoptee.

That is actually a super cool idea. Thanks for the suggestion.


Thank you. This could humanize the homeless and allow those of us who aren't poor to appreciate what we have. Not to mention the good feeling you get when you help someone
 
2014-04-16 02:50:46 PM  

MaliFinn: At some point some very rich people are going to end up getting a lethal education in the difference between power and authority. You can get away with a lot of things, but creating a system where you have a permanent underclass that is allowed to own firearms is a pretty dangerous practice.


Not really.  I've been told repeatedly here that the rich own the government, and separately told even more often that gun owners could never hope to successfully revolt against the government.

If gun owners can't make a difference against the government, how are poor people going to make one against some or lot of those gun owners AND the government?
 
2014-04-16 02:51:14 PM  

p51d007: I'd like to know where the 99%ers get off telling the 1%ers how to live their lives?
Why to "the rich" have to help "the poor"?  Life is hard, life has choices.  If you are
STUPID, a criminal, drug addict, etc, why is it the responsibility of someone else, to
take care of you?  In nature, the strong survive.  If government would get out of the
way and not punish religious organizations, perhaps we could put things back the
way they were 50 years ago and let THEM be the ones who were helping "the poor".
They could do that, instead of building monuments to themselves called megachurches!
Oh, we can't have RELIGIOUS people helping "the poor", it might turn them religious
and they wouldn't vote for idiots from the government to give them free stuff.
You know, when I was a kid, most "street people" were called BUMS.  Perhaps we'd be
all better off to stop calling them "homeless" and go back to calling most of them tramps
or bums!


Bread and circuses, my friend. That army of serfs in the field doing cheap labor to funnel goods to the middle class, who then shovel cash up to the rich owners, will only do so as long as there is food in their bellies and cheap, tawdry, and/ or violent entertainment available (thanks, Game of Thrones). When enough of them are deprived of even those reminders of their human dignity, they will get angry, organize, and rip the rest of us limb from limb. 100 to 1 is terrible odds, even if the 1 has a lot of guns.

Did you see Qaddafi's demise? That's what you're imposing on the upper classes if you can't pretend to have enough compassion to drop some crumbs once in awhile.
 
2014-04-16 02:51:34 PM  

armor helix: There are a lot of homeless shelters with empty rooms every night.

The reason? You have to be sober to use them.

If getting high is more important than a roof over your head that's your choice. But I don't want you sleeping in my dumpster.


People are often unemployable/homeless due to mental illness.  The drugs and alcohol are what's called "self medicating".

I blame the queers and what they're doing to the soil, myself.
 
2014-04-16 02:51:42 PM  

bunner: special20: If hobos have started camping in your back 40 - do this: Pour 20 pounds of sugar on the ground where they camp.

I'm pretty sure that those Silicon Valley ants will have a feast, and ensure that anyone sleeping on their food supply will be bitten, stung, harassed.

Now, where to find anteaters...

Doesn't this end with starving lions and Claymores full of Semtex?


...what if we just skip right to the Claymores? Are the homeless sleeping in armored vehicles? I think not, sir... I think they are not.
 
2014-04-16 02:52:36 PM  

pedrop357: I love that you ignored the rest of the post for the noise pollution part.


I didn't ignore it.  I pretty much dismissed a lot of zoning regulations as archaic, useless gerrymandering tools in a post modern world where an entire corporation can fit on two server blades.


pedrop357: Oh wait, you just came up a lofty idea without considering the logistics of it.



Nah, we're just working off of differently prioritized to do lists.


pedrop357: This is, unsurprisingly, a lot like the people who make zoning regs so restrictive in the first place.


You mean the ones you're adamantly in support of?
 
2014-04-16 02:53:21 PM  
The homeless need to be studied to see what nutrients they possess that can be extracted and exported.
 
2014-04-16 02:54:08 PM  

Hector Remarkable: The homeless need to be studied to see what nutrients they possess that can be extracted and exported.


And then the 1%.  I hear gold is popular.
 
2014-04-16 02:54:32 PM  

pedrop357: Pangea: pedrop357: I'm also curious why people sleeping in their cars aren't being attacked by the left as freeloaders because they get police and fire protection without paying any property taxes.

The right is who typically would be more likely to do that sort of blaming.

Not true at all.  The left can be counted on to chime into any discussion about taxes with biatching about roads, schools, police, fire, and Somalia.


Those bastards! How dare they mention things paid for with taxes in discussions about taxes! Have they no shame?!
 
2014-04-16 02:55:00 PM  
AverageAmericanGuy: "It's more humane to send them on to a lower rent area where they have an actual shot at getting off the street."

*send them*? I'm pretty sure the area cities didn't *bring them* in the first place. So they might want to rethink any plan that involves their being able to make decisions for them.
That approach is going to ultimately lead to them being "sent on" to prisons. Which is one of the more expensive options available.
 
2014-04-16 02:56:25 PM  

UberDave: Diogenes: If you can afford a car you're not poor.

Only if it has a tape deck...with a Creedence tape.


Preferably one with "Lodi" on it. "Fortunate Son" works too.
 
2014-04-16 02:57:36 PM  

bunner: I didn't ignore it. I pretty much dismissed a lot of zoning regulations as archaic, useless gerrymandering tools in a post modern world where an entire corporation can fit on two server blades.


You can ignore them, but any contractors you hire to retrofit this seized building and the government will not.

bunner: pedrop357: This is, unsurprisingly, a lot like the people who make zoning regs so restrictive in the first place.

You mean the ones you're adamantly in support of?


I'm actually not in support of a lot of zoning or building regs in their current form.

I was pointing out how people just like you with lofty ideas about how to prevent/encourage something are the ones who made the inflexible and, in some cases, outright oppressive rules that would kill any hopes for your project.
 
2014-04-16 02:58:16 PM  
The 1% wont rest until the labor is in China, the debt is fully shouldered by the working poor and it's Victorian England, here.  And you best hope you don''t get any bird sh*t on your silk top hat, guv.
 
2014-04-16 02:58:47 PM  

Wendy's Chili: pedrop357: Pangea: pedrop357: I'm also curious why people sleeping in their cars aren't being attacked by the left as freeloaders because they get police and fire protection without paying any property taxes.

The right is who typically would be more likely to do that sort of blaming.

Not true at all.  The left can be counted on to chime into any discussion about taxes with biatching about roads, schools, police, fire, and Somalia.

Those bastards! How dare they mention things paid for with taxes in discussions about taxes! Have they no shame?!


Yep, now if we could just get them to be consistent and rail against these people "leeching off the rest of us" the way they do with others, I'd be quiet about it.
 
2014-04-16 03:00:14 PM  

pippi longstocking: umad: I can explain. Things have to be this way, and we can't structurally get rid of this, because society is composed of humans. Legislate against the laws of nature all you want. You would have just as much success if you attempted to ban gravity.

I thought as humans we were able to transcend our nature. You're saying no, so I suggest we all go around raping every woman you like, kill whoever looks at you funny, take what you want, and defecate wherever nature calls.


And I especially like your choice of using rape, murder, theft, and public defecation as examples of things that humans have transcended. Those things certainly never happen in this day and age. I do agree with you that ending poverty is just as easy as ending any of the things you mentioned. I don't think that is what you were shooting for though.
 
2014-04-16 03:01:07 PM  
why I went there without making sure of housing is no longer relevant.. it happened.. bad choice on my part, but I am sure no one here makes mistakes right? lol.. I am not trying to place blame or anything.. all I am trying to say is that sometimes the reasons people end up homeless aren't the ones most people think of..  it opened my eyes to the stigma of "Homeless" once placed on a person it is hard to shake..  I must give San Jose, CA credit, at that time there were people that would look out for the homeless, every day a huge box of donuts would be placed in a park.. and you would think that the homeless would grab as many as they could.. nope.. just a couple ppl did here and there.. most took 2 and walked away..

you will ALWAYS run into the scammers.. but it is easy to spot them.. a true homeless person would not blink when you offer then a uneaten half of a sandwich.. they would be all thankful.. and since that time I have tried to help people now and then when I have a couple extra bucks.. because what would I end up doing with it? blow it on a 2 liter of soda? 2 bucks can buy a lot of raman noodles..
 
2014-04-16 03:01:15 PM  

pedrop357: I was pointing out how people just like you with lofty ideas about how to prevent/encourage something are the ones who made the inflexible and, in some cases, outright oppressive rules that would kill any hopes for your project.


So, you're holding forth on the wone true way by busting my chops and assigning ideas to me that are largely projections of your POV onto me for the benefit of your Legion of Fans™ so that they won't be mislead by not heeding your offhand dismissal thereof?  Man, you're gonna change the world.  Are you done now?  Cause, uh, seriously.
 
2014-04-16 03:01:30 PM  

Lee451: I guess you missed the part of my post that suggested "adopting" a homeless person and trying to make a difference in their lives.


I had started something about "Suppose we decided that a small subset of us could better handle the affairs of the whole group than could the whole group itself. Now suppose that these delegates agreed that whichever side of a question got more support from the delegates would be the side that 'won out' (subject to other, more specific rules."

So now we've created a legislation based on Representative Democracy, just like we have in the US.

Now suppose that duly-elected legislature decided on how to raise and disburse funds for the needy, in accordance with the charter given them.

Now we're in the 1960s. Congrats, we've done what you asked, only in a way that actually benefits a large swath of those affected by the problem, rather than relying on charities (which were in the 1960s and still are today insufficient to meet the challenges the problems of homelessness present).

By throwing money at the problem I was referring to the "Great Society" program and that the poor/homeless just keep increasing.

And I reiterate: "if you can't see an appreciable difference between the homelessness of the 1950s and the homelessness of today - or the compounding problems both then and now - there's no point in discussing it further." So I guess this'll be my last response, if'n you can't even see that.

/America has the wealthiest poor in the world, especially if you compare the poor here and the poor in India or some other 3rd world nation. Most people considered poor have a car, modern appliances, internet capabilities, and frequently, nice furniture from Rent-a-Center, you get the idea.

So obviously, we should do nothing more, because SOME homeless people drive 20-year-old beaters and can afford a $30/month cell phone, and because we haven't relegated them to third-world poverty we're doing all we can.
 
2014-04-16 03:02:23 PM  

pedrop357: bunner: I didn't ignore it. I pretty much dismissed a lot of zoning regulations as archaic, useless gerrymandering tools in a post modern world where an entire corporation can fit on two server blades.

You can ignore them, but any contractors you hire to retrofit this seized building and the government will not.

bunner: pedrop357: This is, unsurprisingly, a lot like the people who make zoning regs so restrictive in the first place.

You mean the ones you're adamantly in support of?

I'm actually not in support of a lot of zoning or building regs in their current form.

I was pointing out how people just like you with lofty ideas about how to prevent/encourage something are the ones who made the inflexible and, in some cases, outright oppressive rules that would kill any hopes for your project.


So in this thread you've told us we can improve the homeless problem by...

...wait for it....

reducing regulations and lowering taxes.

Even though we've been trying that solution since the early 80s, it's sure to work if we just hold the course!
 
2014-04-16 03:03:10 PM  

Pharmdawg: Bread and circuses, my friend. That army of serfs in the field doing cheap labor to funnel goods to the middle class, who then shovel cash up to the rich owners, will only do so as long as there is food in their bellies and cheap, tawdry, and/ or violent entertainment available (thanks, Game of Thrones). When enough of them are deprived of even those reminders of their human dignity, they will get angry, organize, and rip the rest of us limb from limb. 100 to 1 is terrible odds, even if the 1 has a lot of guns.


Actually, the serfs will still do their work as long as they are getting more for it than what they could otherwise get if they had stayed in the third world.

Do you know why Chinese workers are willing to do mind numbing factory work for such low pay?   Because it beats the shiat out of being a subsistence level peasant farmer. That's their alternative.

What do you call the workers that are between the peasants and the capitalists?  Oh.  Those factory workers are China's "middle" class.  Low middle, but they aren't subsistence level.

Bringing it back home, those migrant field workers?  Either they pick our vegetables and send the profit back home, where their families are now "rich," or they pick their one vegetables back home and get nowhere.

When looked at from that angle?  They won't be revolting any time soon.

You're more likely to see a revolution of the upper-middle class here, and it won't be a communist one.
 
2014-04-16 03:05:34 PM  
I know how they feel - my GF had made do her in the butt last night, and I had to wash my cock off in the sink. It's not my fault she didn't feel like walking to the bathroom to get a nice warm cloth afterward. Sheesh! I felt taken advantage of. At least I got to admire my abs in the mirror.

*tooth sparkle"
 
2014-04-16 03:06:17 PM  

special20: I know how they feel - my GF had made do her in the butt last night, and I had to wash my cock off in the sink. It's not my fault she didn't feel like walking to the bathroom to get a nice warm cloth afterward. Sheesh! I felt taken advantage of. At least I got to admire my abs in the mirror.

*tooth sparkle"


Always relevant.
 
2014-04-16 03:07:09 PM  

pedrop357: Some people WON'T and some people CAN'T follow the rules at shelters, so they end up living on the streets and there isn't a lot we can do about it. We (individually or as a society) can't just unilaterally institutionalize the ones who can't because they have rights and some will obviously have a problem, but be just on the other side of the legal line.


No link*, sorry, but I remember reading an interesting study somewhere about how removing some of the rules from shelters(such as you having to be sober) can actually help the situation and reduce costs - between police interactions, jail, court, damage/vandalism, and medical it's cheaper to provide them housing despite them being souses.  They'll either die or dry out eventually, which is normally only a few years away by the time they hit that low.  It helps even more if said housing is permanent enough that It doesn't count as a 'shelter' anymore.

I might lean libertarian, but I'm also a fiscal hawk that's willing to look into secondary effects.  If you can convince me that providing shelter for everybody will actually decrease government/social costs, we should do it.

*Can't remember enough details to find it through all the cruft.
 
2014-04-16 03:07:22 PM  

special20: I know how they feel - my GF had made do her in the butt last night, and I had to wash my cock off in the sink. It's not my fault she didn't feel like walking to the bathroom to get a nice warm cloth afterward. Sheesh! I felt taken advantage of. At least I got to admire my abs in the mirror.

*tooth sparkle"


I almost appreciate the comic relief.  Almost because you're not really good with this.  Take care.  *click*  :  )
 
2014-04-16 03:08:21 PM  

Dr Dreidel: Lee451:
/America has the wealthiest poor in the world, especially if you compare the poor here and the poor in India or some other 3rd world nation. Most people considered poor have a car, modern appliances, internet capabilities, and frequently, nice furniture from Rent-a-Center, you get the idea.

So obviously, we should do nothing more, because SOME homeless people drive 20-year-old beaters and can afford a $30/month cell phone, and because we haven't relegated them to third-world poverty we're doing all we can.


Exactly what more should we be doing?  Preferably, give some specifics.

When people are talking about how terrible we are as a society to the poor, it's at least worth gaining a little perspective and pointing out that the overwhelming majority of them are far better off than the poor in other countries and on par with the upper class in some 2nd and even 1st world countries.

As a nation, our poor are treated better and are richer than the poor in nearly every other country.

We can do more, but there are limits to what we can do without essentially creating more "poor" to be taken care of and at least some goal should be set so we can use our money to the best effect.

We also have to accept that at least a non-trivial amount of homeless people choose to be that way in the face of alternatives, and another non-trivial amount simply can't NOT be homeless-the junction of their rights, disabilities, and inability to function in anything more organized and/or structured leaves them with nowhere else to live.
 
2014-04-16 03:09:17 PM  

pedrop357: MaliFinn: At some point some very rich people are going to end up getting a lethal education in the difference between power and authority. You can get away with a lot of things, but creating a system where you have a permanent underclass that is allowed to own firearms is a pretty dangerous practice.

Not really.  I've been told repeatedly here that the rich own the government, and separately told even more often that gun owners could never hope to successfully revolt against the government.

If gun owners can't make a difference against the government, how are poor people going to make one against some or lot of those gun owners AND the government?


Starving people don't try to change the system.  They shoot things until their stomach is full.
 
2014-04-16 03:10:06 PM  

Pangea: So in this thread you've told us we can improve the homeless problem by...

...wait for it....

reducing regulations and lowering taxes.

Even though we've been trying that solution since the early 80s, it's sure to work if we just hold the course!


Really?

The moron I was replying to had a great idea to retrofit an unused building to serve as a housing solution for homeless people and didn't care one bit that the zoning regulations would kill that idea very quickly.  The current system of zoning and building regs pretty much everywhere in this country doesn't allow for cheap 'substandard' housing that is immensely better than being homeless.
 
2014-04-16 03:10:37 PM  
"Socialism never took root in America because the poor see themselves not as an exploited proletariat but as temporarily embarrassed millionaires."

― John Steinbeck

You could substitute rebellion for socialism with no change.  Americans refuse to impose anything on millionaires because they insist they will become one one day and don't want to have to live by those rules.

/you won't become a millionaire
 
2014-04-16 03:11:47 PM  

pedrop357: As a nation, our poor are treated better and are richer than the poor in nearly every other country.


I think that's a byproduct of our overall higher wealth, not necessarily a result of policy.

But, the idea holds.  We live in a global market, now.  Everything equalizes.

We need to use the second and third world as our definition of "poor," and compare against that.

From that point of view, we are all rich.  It can't last.
 
2014-04-16 03:11:56 PM  
It's not so much that we're terrible with the poor as that we allowed a small collection of banksters, brokers and other Cayman holiday thieves to dismantle and pocket entire economic sectors and, as long as we came through ok, we let them.  Thusly creating a metric moose load of poor people.  And we happily and vehemently blamed anybody we were told to blame except the people telling us who was to blame.
 
2014-04-16 03:12:43 PM  

Adss2009: you won't become a millionaire


It's possible if you can come up with $100k, and have a decade or so.
 
2014-04-16 03:13:23 PM  

pedrop357: The moron I was replying to had a great idea to retrofit an unused building to serve as a housing solution


Thanks for letting the other shoe drop so loudly.  One more and you can dance with the mods, Demosthenes.
 
2014-04-16 03:15:17 PM  

FizixJunkee: jwa007: The Stealth Hippopotamus: I don't see this as a 1% problem. Homeless people on the street just bother the us 95% ers that have to walk our kids to school because the pan handlers creep the kids out.

You are missing a good teaching moment here.  You can use the homeless as examples of what happen if you pursue degrees in the liberal arts.   Scare the little womprats into STEM.


You know the U.S. already graduates more STEM graduates than we have jobs for, right?

http://www.motherjones.com/environment/2014/03/inquiring-minds-ethan -p erlstein-postdocalypse?fb_action_ids=692395314158529&fb_action_types=o g.likes&fb_source=aggregation&fb_aggregation_id=288381481237582

Quote:
"You've probably heard the claim that the United States needs to produce  morescientists, like Perlstein, to remain competitive with up-and-coming science powerhouses like India and China. It is a familiar litany whenever we hear laments about American science and its disturbing habit of resting on its laurels. But what you rarely hear in this argument is the fact that we don't have nearly enough jobs to put to work the scientists we currently have. "U.S. higher education produces far more science and engineering graduates annually than there are S&E job openings," writes Harvard researcher  , "the only disagreement is whether it is 100 percent or 200 percent more.""


And that is because of the following:

1) US domestic S&E jobs are being given to foreign workers with visas, instead of to US workers with degrees. This is done under the false pretense that there are not enough qualified STEM applicants in the US. This runs counter to the quoted source above, which claims we have more STEM graduates than jobs.

2) The remaining S&E jobs are being outsourced to other other countries

3) It's all about cheap labor. The corporations will feed the masses whatever fake studies needed to justify their hiring of cheap foreign workers over US workers.
 
2014-04-16 03:16:51 PM  

Adss2009: You could substitute rebellion for socialism with no change. Americans refuse to impose anything on millionaires because they insist they will become one one day and don't want to have to live by those rules.


There are a lot of things I'm never going to be, but I won't be imposing rules on them I wouldn't want to live with if I were in their shoes.  It's called principles.  It's not right to do things to people simply because they aren't you.

BTW, we impose a lot of things on millionaires right now, the first thing being higher tax brackets which they can and do escape by donating to legally recognized charities.  If we're unhappy with them having lower tax rates, we can always raise their tax rates even more and watch their donations to those legally recognized charities drop OR if we're upset that the charities they donated to aren't doing what we think charities should do, we can alter the definition of charity.
 
2014-04-16 03:17:08 PM  

Wendy's Chili: meyerkev: And of course, given that immigrants lower wages, why exactly is the Left so pro-poor/unskilled-people-immigration?

I don't know that the Left is "pro-poor-immigration" as much as they're "anti-treating-people-like-animals".

I don't think people should be working in the US if they are not legally allowed to do so. Their status allows employers to violate labor laws and standards, which affects the entire labor market. But I also don't think we should be shipping off some American kid's parents because they didn't fill out proper paperwork 20 years ago.

Putting them on the books and requiring employers to pay them accordingly would do a lot to reduce the downward pressure on wages, and would be a hell of a lot cheaper and humane than rounding them up and throwing them in prisons to await deportation.

The Right (and by "Right" I mean the US Chamber of Commerce and other Republican bankrollers) would rather maintain the status quo and continue to have an underclass of cheap, exploitable labor.


We did that, in 1986.  The result was millions of more illegals. People in Mexico read the newspaper...some are even usando el internet.
 
2014-04-16 03:17:27 PM  

bunner: pedrop357: The moron I was replying to had a great idea to retrofit an unused building to serve as a housing solution

Thanks for letting the other shoe drop so loudly.  One more and you can dance with the mods, Demosthenes.


This is me making my scared face.
 
2014-04-16 03:17:43 PM  

Abe Vigoda's Ghost: Of course very resident of Silicon Valley is a billionaire, and they hate the poor.

[wac.450f.edgecastcdn.net image 245x285]

Most people I know don't want someone living in a car in their neighborhood.


More accurately, most people don't want someone who lives in a car pooping in their garden and tossing their empties on the sidewalk.

Prior to Reagan the federal government housed, fed, and clothed the vast majority of folks who are unable to support themselves due to mental illness. Link These days we force them to live on the street or in prison, then we somehow complain that the cost of both is excessive for the taxpayer. My gut tells me that the cost of restoring taxpayer funded residential facilities would be a bargain by comparison. It might also greatly the improve the lives of folks living on our streets.

/have stepped in human poop twice now
 
2014-04-16 03:18:26 PM  

bunner: Hector Remarkable: The homeless need to be studied to see what nutrients they possess that can be extracted and exported.

And then the 1%.  I hear gold is popular.


I'm gonna go right ahead and include the elderly, and the mentally ill, or, as they like to be called, 'little people'.

There may be tungsten in their tongues.
 
Displayed 50 of 433 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
Advertisement
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report